You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to wsrp4j-dev@portals.apache.org by Diego Louzán <dl...@apache.org> on 2006/04/25 19:32:12 UTC
Redesigning wsrp4j logging system
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I'm currently in the process of redesigning the logging system for
wspr4j and migrate it to commons-logging. I think that the framework as
it is now is unnecessarily complicated, which makes difficult to find
errors when using it. Expect some updates in the next few days.
Any suggestions on this would be very appreciated.
Regards.
Diego.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFETl0cgyzZYflJelERApYcAKCPJ5pp+9svAYhMguBTagTwaOfjdQCfXAvb
xiMZ2K6s381Yer4DP+dtxHM=
=yyPH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: Redesigning wsrp4j logging system
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@apache.org>.
Diego Louzán wrote:
>
> Yeah, I read yours and Carsten's comments and in the end I felt that you
> both agreed that it would be a good idea to move to commons-logging. In
> fact I'm not only thinking in introducing commons-logging, but in
> refactoring the logging code itself, and probably the exception handling
> code too. I've had some headaches dealing with that code :-S
>
I don't want to open the "which logging api is the best" discussion here
and to be honest, I do not really care which api we use. Using an own
logging system makes integrating wsrp4j easier, using an existing api is
more user friendly (wrt configuration). E.g. in Cocoon we are moving
away from logkit to log4j. So for me personally, using commons-logging
or log4j directly in wsrp4j does not cause any problems :)
I would prefer log4j, but commons-logging is fine as well.
So, +1 and a big +1 for improving the logging code itself.
Carsten
--
Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG
http://www.s-und-n.de
http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/
Re: Redesigning wsrp4j logging system
Posted by Diego Louzán <dl...@apache.org>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Elliot Metsger wrote:
> Hi Diego,
>
> You've probably seen this thread but I'll point it out anyway just in
> case you haven't see it!
>
> http://www.nabble.com/forum/ViewPost.jtp?post=1478327&framed=y
>
> I'd like the idea of moving to commons-logging myself. I agree in that
> the wsrp logging seems complicated (if for good reasons).
>
> Elliot
>
> Diego Louzán wrote:
>
> I'm currently in the process of redesigning the logging system for
> wspr4j and migrate it to commons-logging. I think that the framework as
> it is now is unnecessarily complicated, which makes difficult to find
> errors when using it. Expect some updates in the next few days.
>
> Any suggestions on this would be very appreciated.
>
> Regards.
> Diego.
Yeah, I read yours and Carsten's comments and in the end I felt that you
both agreed that it would be a good idea to move to commons-logging. In
fact I'm not only thinking in introducing commons-logging, but in
refactoring the logging code itself, and probably the exception handling
code too. I've had some headaches dealing with that code :-S
Regards.
Diego.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFETmxtgyzZYflJelERAghbAJsGH99tfMbOB8HrvVSddk3P63MAIwCdGoXe
yfVW7Q+NngWrEeeC8D6V4d0=
=WPs0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: Redesigning wsrp4j logging system
Posted by Elliot Metsger <em...@jhu.edu>.
Hi Diego,
You've probably seen this thread but I'll point it out anyway just in
case you haven't see it!
http://www.nabble.com/forum/ViewPost.jtp?post=1478327&framed=y
I'd like the idea of moving to commons-logging myself. I agree in that
the wsrp logging seems complicated (if for good reasons).
Elliot
Diego Louzán wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I'm currently in the process of redesigning the logging system for
> wspr4j and migrate it to commons-logging. I think that the framework as
> it is now is unnecessarily complicated, which makes difficult to find
> errors when using it. Expect some updates in the next few days.
>
> Any suggestions on this would be very appreciated.
>
> Regards.
> Diego.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFETl0cgyzZYflJelERApYcAKCPJ5pp+9svAYhMguBTagTwaOfjdQCfXAvb
> xiMZ2K6s381Yer4DP+dtxHM=
> =yyPH
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----